Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Sikorsky SB-1 flies for first time

Old 7th Oct 2021, 12:31
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hobe Sound, Florida
Posts: 811
SD-Sorry. had not been aware of the testing you mentioned. I stand corrected.

The one thing mentioned by Sultan re the amount of money invested in Comanche etc, could use some clarification. The money and the problem wasn’t the aircraft: when the program was cnx’d, the ship was in great shape, but the mission systems were not, and that subject could have been the subject of a classic Harvard B-School Management Case example problem.
JohnDixson is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2021, 14:01
  #342 (permalink)  
CTR
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by casper64 View Post
Regarding “commercial technology” you mean that aircraft that is 20 years in development and still not certified and will be crazy expensive as well, only filling a niche market?
I was referring to the Bell 525 that first flew in 2016. Without Nick Lappos convincing Textron to fund a clean sheet FBW 525 development, Bell would have developed a warmed over 412.

The 525 program produced a strong engineering team and advanced technology just in time for the V-280 program. Additionally, the 525 forced Bell to completely revamp its manufacturing processes, which really hadn’t been updated for 50 years.

Sikorsky has not designed a new commercial Helicopter since the S 92, over 20 years ago. Boeing has not designed a new commercial rotorcraft in over 40 years.

When designing a commercial helicopter, operating cost is just as important as speed and payload. This is experience neither Boeing or Sikorsky have retained.
CTR is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2021, 16:57
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N/A
Age: 44
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by CTR View Post
I was referring to the Bell 525 that first flew in 2016. Without Nick Lappos convincing Textron to fund a clean sheet FBW 525 development, Bell would have developed a warmed over 412.

The 525 program produced a strong engineering team and advanced technology just in time for the V-280 program. Additionally, the 525 forced Bell to completely revamp its manufacturing processes, which really hadn’t been updated for 50 years.

Sikorsky has not designed a new commercial Helicopter since the S 92, over 20 years ago. Boeing has not designed a new commercial rotorcraft in over 40 years.

When designing a commercial helicopter, operating cost is just as important as speed and payload. This is experience neither Boeing or Sikorsky have retained.
Understood! 👍
casper64 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2021, 00:43
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,129
Originally Posted by CTR View Post
Based on this logic, the US Army should have stayed with the Huey like the US Marines.

The Bell (independent of Boeing) V-280 Valor is not a V-22 when it comes to cost per flight hour. The V-280 is based on Bell developed commercial aircraft technology, not 40 year old V-22 military technology. Commercial customers care a lot more about cost per flight hour than the military.
I appreciate that maintenance hours translate pretty directly into cost/flight hour.
That said, for military gear, serviceability is key. Hangar queens are rightly despised by all services, they are useless burdens impeding the ability to perform.
So imho the Army would be better served with stuff that works reliably, that has enough margin to continue even if something goes out. and that is easy to keep in shape, rather than with Avatar inspired contraptions that cost more but don't deliver proportionately.
etudiant is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2021, 17:55
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 657
Originally Posted by casper64 View Post
No, you can have some speed increase with modern rotor systems, clearly range increase is interesting, but this can also be achieved with more modern engines/technologies. And clearly subjects like C4I, operation in DVE, etc are relevant… I just don’t see the “speed thing” and it’s crazy configurations to reach this goal, with all its drawbacks as really relevant.
Regarding “commercial technology” you mean that aircraft that is 20 years in development and still not certified and will be crazy expensive as well, only filling a niche market?
Just like what I presume we will start hearing from the Sikorsky/Boeing camps in earnest - I think you are very much overselling the possible speed and range improvements from something like ITEP on the old platforms.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2021, 21:39
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 638
https://www.defensenews.com/digital-...n-the-pacific/

If you want to play with the professionals in the Pacific range and speed are all that count.
The Sultan is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2021, 22:05
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N/A
Age: 44
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by The Sultan View Post
https://www.defensenews.com/digital-...n-the-pacific/

If you want to play with the professionals in the Pacific range and speed are all that count.
No, that is exactly what I meant before… ok, so the army does not envy the Air Force, but actually the marines….. yes they have speed: JSF, Osprey, but I bet they also still want Yankee hueys and Cobras at treetop level together with their troops on ground when hitting the coastline…. I simply cannot see how a defiant or valor could take that role with the same efficiency…. They could co-exist, like the osprey amd the Y-hueys… but completely replacing them???
casper64 is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2021, 14:17
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 638
Originally Posted by casper64 View Post
They could co-exist, like the osprey amd the Y-hueys… but completely replacing them???
That is exactly what the Marines are doing with their RFP for a new medium vertical lift. It is similar to the FLRAA except faster and longer range.
The Sultan is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2021, 17:38
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N/A
Age: 44
Posts: 77
Originally Posted by The Sultan View Post
That is exactly what the Marines are doing with their RFP for a new medium vertical lift. It is similar to the FLRAA except faster and longer range.
The range I understand. A bit faster as well say 160-170 KIAS at sea level. But without compromise to agility and surviveability of current platforms… and without crazy costs…simply cannot imagine that either defiant or valor is fulfilling those criteria. To my opinion only a “traditional” helicopter can fulfill that. But we will see in 20-30 years how it played out 👍
casper64 is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2021, 06:13
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 118
Originally Posted by casper64 View Post
The range I understand. A bit faster as well say 160-170 KIAS at sea level. But without compromise to agility and surviveability of current platforms… and without crazy costs…simply cannot imagine that either defiant or valor is fulfilling those criteria. To my opinion only a “traditional” helicopter can fulfill that. But we will see in 20-30 years how it played out 👍
The Marines announced the program to replace UH-1Y/AH-1Z is called Aura. It will be more expensive and later than FLRAA. Among the requirements originally announced were a maximum continuous cruise speed of 295kt (546km/h) at 90% maximum continuous power and 330kt indicated airspeed at 100% of intermediate-rated power. It needs to be able to work with Osprey and in some missions be faster. Also,an un-refueled combat radius of 450nm (833km), with a 30min loiter. They want two plots and two door gunners in the -1Y replacement, plus eight riflemen. They also want an attack version with high commonality, like they did with the -1Y/Z

A modified V-280 might be able to meet those requirements, but it's more likely we'd see a separate aircraft, using some Valor-derived technology. No way a conventional helo could meet the need and personally I doubt if an X2 vehicle could either.
Commando Cody is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2021, 13:55
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 884
Originally Posted by Commando Cody View Post
A modified V-280 might be able to meet those requirements, but it's more likely we'd see a separate aircraft, using some Valor-derived technology. No way a conventional helo could meet the need and personally I doubt if an X2 vehicle could either.
Indeed, this one has 'Tilt Rotor' written all over it. On the Downside, chances are there will be only one candidate for supplier. Might not help regarding pricing in the RfP.
henra is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.